I have a question. Initially DSR and SF where two distinct values (2% and 4% i believe) but very soon they has been equated. Is there any economical reason for that?
I believe In theory SF>DSR since there exists bigger than 0 risk for MKR holders on DAI placed in DSR?
I’m aware that MKR holders still benefit from SF of DAI that are in circulation and not in DSR (for taking risk of their price dropping) but I believe MKR Holders also carry non-zero risk on DAI placed in DSR despite the fact that they are out of a circulation, so there should be some risk premium on those DAI as well (expressed in SF being higher than DSR)?
I’m aware that both DRS and SF are simply result of voting and as such might be just result of some arbitrary convictions of MKR holders, but since DSR=SF is being voted constantly by big holders I hope there is some reeasoning behind it and It can be clarified here.
Also my other thought:
maybe we should think about SF as value reflecting risk imposed on MKR holders by DAI in circulation and SF - DSR as value reflecting risk imposed on MKR holders by DAI out of a circulation (in DSR).
How this risks differs ?